On 22/03/2013 access t wrote:>On 22/03/2013 kieranl wrote:>>So that's left of Lawrence. Only a slight misdirection.>>Also can't understand why Lawrence gets any stars. Those first pitches>>are a complete waste of space. Would be better to rap in.>>Ah, Kieran - there's nothing like the feeling of dirt under your fingernails.>And a shrub in your hand...

On 22/03/2013 kuu wrote:>On 22/03/2013 access t wrote:>>On 22/03/2013 kieranl wrote:>>>So that's left of Lawrence. Only a slight misdirection.>>>Also can't understand why Lawrence gets any stars. Those first pitches>>>are a complete waste of space. Would be better to rap in.>>>>Ah, Kieran - there's nothing like the feeling of dirt under your fingernails.>>And a shrub in your hand...>>Sorry Lady, that ain't no shrub, that's a belay !!
All shrub belays have their day>

On 20/03/2013 Wendy wrote:>So it appears Damo has an uncanny knack for telling the future. Another>slackline is in place above Eskimo Nell at the moment. The original bolts>are still in place, but they have actually drilled a few new ones. So there>are now about 10 bolts above EN. It's rigged to the top of Ice Cream Man,>so I guess there are another 4 bolts over there.>>The grumpy woman in me was tempted to take the whole set up. Does anyone>have any idea who these people are and how we can get across the message>that throwing bolts in willy nilly to rig slacklines in a state park is>not acceptable?

Before dropping the wombat into the blender I decided to go up and have a look at what was going on up there. Uninformed rage is great fun but...
I counted a total of 9 bolts up there including the rap rings. Before we get out the pitchforks and dunking stools, I can see the rationale behind each. I've got some photos that I'll edit up and post tomorrow.
The bolts are divided into 3 groups. There's the cluster of four hangerless bolts near the top of eskimo nell, three of them with nuts. There's the two rap rings. Just over the top to the northwest from the rap rings are 3 bolts with hangers.
It looks like the set of 4 are for the highline to Bluff Major. The set of 3 are for a separate highline across the gully.
They all appear to be 12mm galv bolts (actual 12mm rod, not 10mm inside a 12mm sleeve). I assume they're glued. Hangers are mostly Petzl but a couple on the opposit side of the gully are Singing Rock.
Probably my biggest concern with these bolts is that they're galv rather than SS, so they're going to corrode. They'll last a long time but will corrode much faster than SS and with SS hangers there'll be some galvanic corrosion.
I was going to review the videos before posting this but my web is playing up tonite so I'll also review it tomorrow.
Initial impressions, bearing in mind that what I know about slacklining isn't worth knowing :
1. While there are good natural belays on top of Dunes buttress, there aren't great natural anchors in the correct line for these 2 highlines. The forces on the anchors on these things are enormous and any anchors have to be beyond-doubt bomb-proof. The only nut placements that fit the bill are in the Eskimo Nell Crack and they would have to pull along and inside the crack which doesn't look good for that purpose.
2. To me, it doesn't appear that the second highline could have been safely rigged from the set of four hangerless bolts.
What it comes down to me is : are the highlines justified? I'm not a slackliner and never will be, but I can see that it's a pretty wild project, a triangle from Dunes to the bluffs to the top of Major Mitchell gully then back to Dunes.
Contrary to my original impression there are not new bolts placed next to old hangerless bolts. Nor are they just placing bolts next to bombproof natural gear. To rig these highlines without the bolts would be difficult, complex and therefore probably dangerous. My assessment of the rigging needs could be faulty and it would be good to hear from someone who really knows their stuff.
It's good to see that they're not using standard climbing bolts though it's a pity they're galv. I don't know what they've done on the bluffs, perhaps The Good Dr knows. Hopefully no longer using the rap anchors.
As I said, I'll get some photos up tomorrow.

How about a blanket ban on all bolts, for climbing protection, anchors and abseils, and also for highlines?
The grey area of self regulated bolting doesn't seem to work, as there are more bolts and abseil points being installed every year. A blanket ban (as in legally enforceable) would solve all the debates and protect the Araps Trad ethic for generations to come.

Failing that, having the main highline areas fitted out with crazy bomber fixed anchors so as to remove the need to install new ones seems like the next best option.
As ODH posted, highliners (unless they are climbers too) don't have an inherent respect for the asthetics of the rock, and this worries me as they will be less likely to display restraint in their bolting habits.

On 25/03/2013 Mike Bee wrote:>How about a blanket ban on all bolts, for climbing protection, anchors>and abseils, and also for highlines?>The grey area of self regulated bolting doesn't seem to work, as there>are more bolts and abseil points being installed every year. A blanket>ban (as in legally enforceable) would solve all the debates and protect>the Araps Trad ethic for generations to come.>
So you're proposing we remove all bolts at Arapiles? It's a valid proposal. However, don't hark back to some supposed "trad" era with no bolts. Bolts have been there since the very early days.

>Failing that, having the main highline areas fitted out with crazy bomber>fixed anchors so as to remove the need to install new ones seems like the>next best option.>As ODH posted, highliners (unless they are climbers too) don't have an>inherent respect for the asthetics of the rock, and this worries me as>they will be less likely to display restraint in their bolting habits.
So climbers will act as a vigilante force to manage another user group? Do you expect that to go down well? There would be more than a whiff of hypocrisy about it too. You make some very sweeping generalisations about the "qualities" of different user groups. Are you sure that ODH is a reliable reference point here?

I think that we're dealing with another user group intruding on our turf and it's a bit unsettling..

On 25/03/2013 kieranl wrote:
.>So climbers will act as a vigilante force to manage another user group?>Do you expect that to go down well? There would be more than a whiff of>hypocrisy about it too. You make some very sweeping generalisations about>the "qualities" of different user groups.

I really appreciate a lot of your input into this thread Kieran, but I think there's a subtle contradiction between this statement and earlier when you said:

"when they do rubbish like this (spraying bolts on top of bolts on top of bolts) they need to brought into line.."

On 25/03/2013 hotgemini wrote:>I really appreciate a lot of your input into this thread Kieran, but I>think there's a subtle contradiction between this statement and earlier>when you said:>>"when they do rubbish like this (spraying bolts on top of bolts on top>of bolts) they need to brought into line.."
But then I went up there yesterday evening and saw that what I had envisioned from the reports wasn't actually correct.
*Edit* It doesn't appear to be a case of "No hangers on these bolts so we'll just place our own". There appear to be good reasons for having separate sets of bolts. I don't even know if any of them are new this year as I'm not clear on what was up there last year.

I still don't know about them Kieren. I just look at the whole area and think if I took it in my head to set up a triangle of highlines around there, I could do it without placing any bolts. That whole top of Eskimo Nell there is raised - you could bung a rope around the whole thing. On the ice cream man side, well, the route is a splitter crack to the top. Top of the Bluff, there are loads of things. Maybe you might have to play with the angles of the lines, but you could work it out. Maybe it's not a straightforward exercise, but then, maybe that's just what people have to be able to do to set these things up here. Otherwise people could justify similar collections of bolts appearing in a bunch of other places. From the pharos to the main cliff. Between the two halves of Mitre rock. Across any other gully someone felt excited about. And for people to get to the top of the Bluffs, they must have climbing and gear skills already.

I haven't heard from the video guy and there was noone around the camp (which looked like they were packing up) yesterday.

On 25/03/2013 kieranl wrote:>So you're proposing we remove all bolts at Arapiles? It's a valid proposal.>However, don't hark back to some supposed "trad" era with no bolts. Bolts>have been there since the very early days.

I didn't say that. I was advocating stopping bolting further into the future.
That said, I'd rather remove all bolts and ban it, rather than have it as a free for all for a range of user groups.

>So climbers will act as a vigilante force to manage another user group?

Pretty sure I didn't say that either. The fact that there are good quality abseil anchors already around the place means that when other climbers go to Araps, they can use the fixed gear that is alreay in place, rather than need to install their own. All I was suggesting was that the same idea be applied to some high line anchors in the more obvious highline places. If there are already 100% bomber anchors already installed and available to all highliners, then hopefully the word would spread through that community that Arapiles is not a BYO Drill location, that it's ready to go and further impacts on the rock are not needed.

>You make some very sweeping generalisations about>the "qualities" of different user groups. Are you sure that ODH is a reliable>reference point here?

Climbers use the rock as both our playground and our means of safety. High liners use the rock only for safety, their playground is the void between rock towers. To me, it seems logical that climbers would instinctively (on average across the whole user group) seek to protect the visual aspects of the cliff because part of our experience involves the asthetics of the climbs themselves. As long as the rock is strong enough to hold their anchors, a highliner doesn't have any further motivation to preserve the rock, so they are less likely to be discreet or thrifty with their bolting.

On 25/03/2013 Cliff wrote:>I don't mean to offend Mike, but you've just demonstrated the "sweeping>generalisations" Kieran mentioned. I can give heaps of examples where climbers>have trashed the rock (and campsites, trails, bush, wildlife, etc); and>its just poor logic to argue as you did that slackliners have any less>motivation to care about their impact on the rock than climbers. After>all, many slackliners were climbers first; and plenty of slackliners use>padding to protect tree trunks when slacklining, demonstrating concern>for the environment.

I wasn't denying that I made some sweeping generalisations, just elaborating on them.
The key part of my statement (in my mind anyway) was the line "on average across the whole user group".

Think of it in terms of normal curves, where the left of the x-axis is pure "leave no trace" ethic, and right is "I have the right to do whatever I would like to the rock", I'm suggesting that the climbing population's normal curve median/mean/mode would be further left than that of the highliners. It's totally untested and probably never will be, but the logic behind it seems quite logical to me (funny that).

Note, I'm just referring to looking after the rock, the environment as a whole is a different discussion.

>When climbers do rein in their selfishness, its usually>bc the tribe teaches how to behave/sets the rules; and most people have>a need to fit in.

This actually reinforces my point quite nicely. The average behaviour of the tribe of climbers is further towards the "less bolts" end of the spectrum, than the average of the highliners (based on evidence seen at Araps so far). There are some climbers who think we should grid bolt the organ pipes, but these are balanced by others who think that Araps has too many bolts/abseils/belays and some should be cut. On average we have the self governed equilibrium that we have now.

The concern I have (and perhaps some others too), is that if highliners come in and start generously bolting where natural gear is available (and I make no judgement on if that is the case here, as kieran is far more highly qualified that I am to convey an opinion on that), then that example will allow those climbers who are a bit more bolt happy than the average to begin to drag the climbers bell curve a bit further right. Next thing we have bolts being placed next to good natural protection on established classics, and those of us a bit further towards the "no bolts" end of things have our voices drowned out for ever. The number of bolts seem to accrue exponentially, so it makes sense to try and cap superfluous bolts, I think.

Firstly, I think your all wrong about everything. What else do I think? Well.....I dont do much of that but I would hope that when all these high ropes courses are up and running that the folks can actually slack-line and not just spend all day slappin they're thighs about much to the disappointment of the pretty girls and boys that came to witness amazing feats only to be bored shirtless. The K for razey slackline syndicate hoofed a carrot out of zigzag fairly easily but at least they then placed they're own gear. Yes its a bit unsightly but no more so than your average top out anchors. By the way I really like the concept of slacklining and also spend a great deal of time watching youtube clips of australian "shuffleing" dancers. They "shuffle" in the wackiest places, its totally rad.

Surely this is topic for NAC and should be in the private section of the Forum as it is really all to do with safety.
I would not be at all surprised if it were in fact NM who is pulling the dodgy anchors and putting in safe new ones . .

>2. Anchors placed for climbing and abseiling are never used for rigging>highlines due to the risk of compromising the strength of the anchors.

Why? Highlining won't damage bolts unless they do something crazy. Bolts which have been damaged to the point where they are liable to fail under bodyweight will look damaged. I didn't notice anything at all on the Missing Link rap bolts which were used for a slackline.>>.* Note that natural anchors suitable for climbing anchors may not be>suitable for highline anchors.

Slacklines don't generate end of the world forces. Should stop pandering to the slackliner notion that they need 16mm bolts for their nonsense. There's no good reason why they shouldn't build natural anchors when available.

5. Total 'tards who haven't ever seen a nut or cam, have never drilled a hole in rock, don't know their earhole from a bolthole, should not be bringing a drill to Araps to "work out how to do it".

On 25/03/2013 One Day Hero wrote:>>Why? Highlining won't damage bolts unless they do something crazy.
I thought this was the whole point of the activity.>>Slacklines don't generate end of the world forces. Should stop pandering>to the slackliner notion that they need 16mm bolts for their nonsense.>There's no good reason why they shouldn't build natural anchors when available.
Too tired to work out resultant vectors at this time of night.>>5. Total 'tards who haven't ever seen a nut or cam, have never drilled>a hole in rock, don't know their earhole from a bolthole, should not be>bringing a drill to Araps to "work out how to do it".
Good general rule for all categories of visitors.

Kieranl:>Too tired to work out resultant vectors at this time of night.

Assuming a 30m horizontal slackline and 2m of drop in the middle, 80kg person in the middle. Downward force is 800N (I'm too lazy to use 9.8 tonight). It's been too long since I've been down to Arapiles to picture the distances involved, but I have a feeling we're talking some decent gaps. In any case, the angles seem to be about what I've seen in slacklines - they're not *that* slack.

Load angle is about 8 degrees below horizontal. That comes to about 3kN (300kg equivalent) on the anchors. If you drop it to 1m of slack then it's about 6kN on each anchor, and 0.5m gives 12kN. Shorter lines for the same slack give lower loads.

Note that these are the generated loads, and are going to be static. There's no safety factor, and nothing taken into account for bounce loads. If you take a reasonably conservative 4 fold multiplier for those, you're getting up to the breaking strain of a lot of natural gear even for the best case scenario.

I suppose if you had a belayer on each side with enough slack that you weren't going to generate huge loads you could test things, but I can see the attraction in multiple BFO bolts, particularly if the slack line is going to be your safety line as well.